ZIASUN TECHNOLOGIES, INC. V. FLOYD D. SCHNEIDER, ET AL. The company is a
party Plaintiff in the matter of ZiaSun Technologies, Inc. v. Floyd D.
Schneider, et al., United States District Court, Western District of Washington,
C99-1025. This action arises from the defendants alleged defamatory campaign
against the Company and its officers and directors. This alleged cyber smear
campaign involved the defendants postings of statements about the Company and
its offices and directors which are alleged to be false and defamatory. The
Company alleges that the defendants were and are knowingly posting false
statements with the intent of negatively impacting the Company's stock prices in
order for defendants to benefit financially in short selling. To protect the
Company, its shareholders and its officers and directors, on June 24, 1999, the
Company filed a civil action in the United States District Court, Western
District of Washington seeking damages and injunction relief, alleging among
other things, Securities Fraud through the defendants posting of false and
misleading defamatory statements, violation of the Washington Consumer
Protection Act, Intentional Interference with Business Expectancy, Violation of
Federal RICO Statute 28 USA Sec. 1962, and violation of Washington's Criminal
Profiteering Act. On November 29,1999, defendant, Stephen Worthington who posts
under the name "Auric Goldfinger" filed a motion to dismiss on various grounds
including that Washington was improper venue. The Honorable Marcia Pechman
granted the Company's motion for preliminary injunction against Floyd Schneider
on January 21, 2000, restraining him from posting defamatory or untrue remarks
on the internet or elsewhere. On February 28, 2000, the Court granted the
defendant, Worthington's motion on the grounds of improper venue without ruling
on the defendant's other claims motions, and further ruled on the Court's own
initiative that venue was inappropriate for all defendants, dismissing the case.
The Company thereafter filed a motion for reconsideration of the dismissal
asking in the alternative that this case be transferred to another venue. The
Court granted The Company's motion for reconsideration on March 24, 2000,
reinstating the action and pending preliminary injunction, and subsequently, on
April 7, 2000, ordered that the entire action be transferred to the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California. The case was
physically retained in Washington for 30 days and then transferred to the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California, before the
Honorable Charles R. Breyer, on approximately May 5, 2000. The case has since
been transferred to Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton. The matter is pending at present
time. |
